End points in clinical trials in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: time for more dialogue?

We observed lack of clarity and consistency in end point definitions of large randomized clinical trials in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. These inconsistencies are such that trials might, in fact, address different clinical questions. They complicate interpretation of results, including comparisons across studies. Problems arise from different ways to account for events occurring after randomization including absence of improvement in disease status, treatment discontinuation or the initiation of new therapy. We call for more dialogue between stakeholders to define with clarity the questions of interest and corresponding end points. We illustrate that assessing different end point rules across a range of plausible patient journeys can be a powerful tool to facilitate such a discussion and contribute to better understanding of patient-relevant end points.

What is this article about? This article talks about the lack of clarity and consistency in the definitions of outcomes used in clinical trials that investigate new treatments for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. This is mainly due to how these different outcome definitions handle events such as absence of improvement in disease status, treatment discontinuation or initiation of new treatment. The authors discuss how these inconsistencies make it hard to interpret the results of individual clinical trials and to compare results across clinical trials.Why is it important? Defining the above events and consequently defining outcomes affects what we can learn from the trials and can lead to different results. Some approaches may not reflect good and bad outcomes for patients appropriately. This makes it challenging for patients, physicians, health authorities and payors to understand the true benefit of treatments under investigation and which one is better.What are the key take-aways? This article serves as a call-to-action for more dialogue among all stakeholders involved in drug development and the decision-making process related to drug evaluations. There is an urgent need for clinical trials to be designed with more clarity and consistency on what is being measured so that relevant questions for patients and prescribing physicians are addressed. Understanding patient journeys will be key to successfully understand what truly matters to patients and how to measure the benefit of new treatments. Such discussions will contribute toward more clarity and consistency in the evaluation of new treatments.

Implementation of precision medicine in healthcare-A European perspective.

The technical development of high-throughput sequencing technologies and the parallel development of targeted therapies in the last decade have enabled a transition from traditional medicine to personalized treatment and care. In this way, by using comprehensive genomic testing, more effective treatments with fewer side effects are provided to each patient-that is, precision or personalized medicine (PM). In several European countries-such as in England, France, Denmark, and Spain-the governments have adopted national strategies and taken "top-down" decisions to invest in national infrastructure for PM. In other countries-such as Sweden, Germany, and Italy with regionally organized healthcare systems-the profession has instead taken "bottom-up" initiatives to build competence networks and infrastructure to enable equal access to PM. In this review, we summarize key learnings at the European level on the implementation process to establish sustainable governance and organization for PM at the regional, national, and EU/international levels. We also discuss critical ethical and legal aspects of implementing PM, and the importance of access to real-world data and performing clinical trials for evidence generation, as well as the need for improved reimbursement models, increased cross-disciplinary education and patient involvement. In summary, PM represents a paradigm shift, and modernization of healthcare and all relevant stakeholders-that is, healthcare, academia, policymakers, industry, and patients-must be involved in this system transformation to create a sustainable, non-siloed ecosystem for precision healthcare that benefits our patients and society at large.

Building a Healthcare Alliance for Resourceful Medicine Offensive Against Neoplasms in Hematology Added Value Framework for Hematologic Malignancies: A Comparative Analysis of Existing Tools.

OBJECTIVES: The Innovative Medicines Initiative-funded, multistakeholders project Healthcare Alliance for Resourceful Medicine Offensive Against Neoplasms in Hematology (HARMONY) created a task force involving patient organizations, medical associations, pharmaceutical companies, and health technology assessment/regulator agencies' representatives to evaluate the suitability of previously established value frameworks (VFs) for assessing the clinical and societal impact of new interventions for hematologic malignancies (HMs). METHODS: Since the HARMONY stakeholders identified the inclusion of patients' points of view on evaluating VFs as a priority, surveys were conducted with the patient organizations active in HMs and part of the HARMONY network, together with key opinion leaders, pharmaceutical companies, and regulators, to establish which outcomes were important for each HM. Next, to evaluate VFs against the sources of information taken into account (randomized clinical trials, registries, real-world data), structured questionnaires were created and filled by HARMONY health professionals to specify preferred data sources per malignancy. Finally, a framework evaluation module was built to analyze existing clinical VFs (American Society of Clinical Oncology, European Society of Medical Oncology, Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale, Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks, and patient-perspective VF). RESULTS: The comparative analysis describes challenges and opportunities for the use of each framework in the context of HMs and drafts possible lines of action for creating or integrating a more specific, patient-focused clinical VF for HMs. CONCLUSIONS: None of the frameworks meets the HARMONY goals for a tool that applies to HMs and assesses in a transparent, reproducible, and systematic way the therapeutic value of innovative health technologies versus available alternatives, taking a patient-centered approach and using real-world evidence.

Patient-reported outcomes in HSCT for autoimmune diseases: Considerations on behalf of the EBMT ADWP, PAC, and Nurses Group.

Background: Over the last 3 decades, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been successfully used to treat severe and refractory autoimmune diseases (AIDs). A multidisciplinary appraisal of potential benefits and risks by disease and transplant specialists is essential to determine individual suitability for HSCT. Objective: Our aim was to observe that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life instruments can capture the unique patient perspective on disease burden and impact of treatment. Methods: Herein, we describe the basis and complexity of end points measuring patient-reported perceptions of efficacy and tolerability used in clinical practice and trials for patients with AIDs undergoing autologous HSCT. Results: PRO measures and patient-reported experience measures are key tools to evaluate the impact and extent of disease burden for patients affected by AIDs. For formal scientific assessment, it is essential that validated general instruments are used, whereas adaptations have resulted in disease-specific instruments that may help guide tailored interventions. An additional approach relates to qualitative evaluations, from carefully structured qualitative research to informal narratives, as patient stories. The patients' subjectively reported responses to HSCT may be influenced by their preprocedure expectations and investment in the HSCT journey. Conclusions: The complexity of AIDs advocates for individualized and multidisciplinary approach to positively affect the patient journey. PROs and health-related quality of life need to be collected using validated instruments in clinical practice and trials to enable robustness of data and to ensure the impact of the intervention is comprehensively assessed, addressing the main questions and needs of the involved stakeholders.

Patient engagement in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cell therapy: a survey by the EBMT patient engagement task force & transplantation complications working party.

The EBMT (European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Society) aims to connect patients, the scientific community, and other stakeholders to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy outcomes. We performed a cross-sectional online survey to understand the perceptions regarding Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient Active Involvement in Research (PAIR) in over 800 stakeholders (n = 813). Patients (n = 278) and health care professionals (HCPs) (n = 351) were compared. We observed high openness for EBMT PRO collection (n = 680, 84.5% across stakeholders' groups; patients n = 256, 93.1% versus HCPs n = 273, 78.4% [p < 0.001]) and PAIR (n = 702, 87.3% across stakeholder groups; patients n = 256, 92.4% versus HCPs n = 296, 85.8% [p = 0.009]), with a significantly higher proportion of patients expressing interest compared to HCPs. Priority domains for PROs data-collection identified were the assessment of symptom experience, psychosocial and cognitive functioning. The most important issues for patients specifically were the data-collection of PROs reflecting cognitive function, the option of reporting data at home, the importance of identifying actionable targets to improve their recovery, and receiving feedback on their input when participating in research projects. Our multistakeholder approach suggests an added value to embracing patient engagement in the development of meaningful research and service design within the transplantation and cellular therapy community.

Access to and affordability of CAR T-cell therapy in multiple myeloma: an EBMT position paper.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is a promising immunotherapeutic approach in the treatment of multiple myeloma, and the recent approval of the first two CAR T-cell products could result in improved outcomes. However, it remains a complex and expensive technology, which poses challenges to health-care systems and society in general, especially in times of crises. This potentially accelerates pre-existing inequalities as access to CAR T-cell therapy varies, both between countries, depending on the level of economic development, and within countries, due to structural disparities in access to quality health care-a parameter strongly correlated with socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and lifestyle. Here, we identify two important issues: affordability and access to CAR T-cell treatment. This consensus statement from clinical investigators, clinicians, nurses, and patients from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) proposes solutions as part of an innovative collaborative strategy to make CAR T-cell therapy accessible to all patients with multiple myeloma.

The EHA Research Roadmap: Immune-based Therapies for Hematological Malignancies.

In 2016, the European Hematology Association (EHA) published the EHA Roadmap for European Hematology Research1 aiming to highlight achievements in the diagnostics and treatment of blood disorders, and to better inform European policy makers and other stakeholders about the urgent clinical and scientific needs and priorities in the field of hematology. Each section was coordinated by 1-2 section editors who were leading international experts in the field. In the 5 years that have followed, advances in the field of hematology have been plentiful. As such, EHA is pleased to present an updated Research Roadmap, now including 11 sections, each of which will be published separately. The updated EHA Research Roadmap identifies the most urgent priorities in hematology research and clinical science, therefore supporting a more informed, focused, and ideally a more funded future for European Hematology Research. the 11 EHA Research Roadmap sections include normal hematopoiesis; malignant lymphoid diseases; malignant myeloid diseases; anemias and related diseases; platelet disorders; blood coagulation and hemostatic disorders; transfusion medicine; infections in hematology; hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; CAR-T and Other cell-based immune therapies; and gene therapy.

Health Literacy: Read All about It .

One of the key goals in the personalised medicine era is to improve communication between front-line healthcare professionals and their patients. The latter should have an equal role in any decisions made about their treatment, and this requires them to be able to input vital information, such as lifestyle and work circumstances, as well as to be properly informed from the other side. Discussions should be a two-way street. To help facilitate this, it is more important than ever to bring Europe together in a way that improves the already significant skills that healthcare professionals possess to permit co-decision-making which will effectively empower the patient. Clearly, the healthcare professional is trained to be an expert in diagnosing conditions and suggesting treatments. And yet the patient also knows more about his or her own lifestyle, work environment and how much he can rely on family-care resources, for example, so co-decision is a growing part of modern-day medicine. Ultimately, the two must work together to produce the optimal result.